I also want to point out that many of our comrades here who disagree with our takes on Decolonization are being good party members and holding the lines that their and many parties around the world are holding, hope in the American workers. But these parties especially the ones in the settler colonies of North America have not done the necessary investigation of their settler society and land and resource theft. Many of them are petit/semi (landed) bourgeois, educated, and through this have privileged entrance into Marxist theory, me included. We know that Lenin and the colonized comrades had an uphill battle against European Chauvinism within the international Communist movement which is what crystalized Marxism Leninism in the first place.
There is no reason to abstract internal colonization as either finished or different from external colonization, even calling it internal colonization makes it seem like the solution for the colonized Africans and indigenous nations is to absorb them into the settler nation. No, the settler states exist on stolen resources that they use to dominate the rest of the world, but its connection to wealth is here, inside its borders. It needs settlers to take land and hold it for the bourgeoisie to later expropriate. It needs settler dominated unions to build and work the environmentally extractive and damaging infrastructure that only benefits the settler masses. I posted about armed indigenous resistance (backed by the Panthers) to racist fishing enclosures in the 1960s that sparked the American Indian Movement, and that post had far less traction than this one about MWM.
American comrades, find out what tribes inhabited the places you have physical connections to. Learn how they came to no longer own that territory and why you and your people now do. You will learn far more about capitalism and America than through studying other movements, because our conditions are not the same. Apply the methodologies of MLism to the history of this continent, stop importing the solutions from others.
Uncritical platforming of Haz is the most recent example. He called everyone who criticized him for that Liberals. Haz is anti-Land Back and a settler nationalist.
And look, I overall have a positive view of RBN, but Nick is the one I'm most worried about. It's coming to the point where he's either in it for clout or fails to differentiate clout from correctness.
Speaking on Rainer: He criticizes "Liberal" positions on Land Back and Black Liberation while forming unity with Libertarians (actual Liberals) on anti-Imperialism while calling Black Agenda Report's refusal to work with that crowd "wrecker" behavior. He calls Horne and Sakai "wreckers". Centering external facing Imperialism as the primary contradiction over internal Imperialism brings you to politics such as this.
Who's to say these folks are "Liberals"? Do we just take Rainer's word for it since they call out that his dead end politics are resorting to working with white supremacists?
He shows no serious attempt to advance the decolonial movement, but like MWM is more than willing to work with open PatSocs. 🤷🏾
He's willing to work with reactionaries that are unhappy with the US Imperialism and the fact that it is taking away from working class conditions. Through this these allies are platformed as "MLs" that are Settler Nationalists, anti-Indian, anti-Black, extremely transphobic, anti-"Globalist" (🐕 😙), calling people "d*generates" and white haters. They agree with Vaush far more than any MLs.
He's a journalist/podcaster that relies on audience donations to stay in business. He may not be a grifter in intentions but he relies on grifters to grow his platform. He's ultimately a tailist, but what's the qualitative difference between a tailist and a grifter?
MWM (Eddie) and Rainer Shea are crypto patsocs. They don't believe in Land Back and Black Liberation, they believe Settler Colonialism in the US is over and thus the decolonial movement doesn't apply.
They are dogmatists who refuse to do any historical research of North America, and are class reductionists (who ignore that racism and colonialism are class systems in the first place).
Nick from RBN invited Eddie and Haz on after Eddie debated Vaush. Nick b talking to LaRouchites on his show so at this point I'm not surprised. These guys are all grifters.
The States' bourgeois education system refuses to develop the engineering talents of the masses. China, Iran, and Russia (mostly historic investment still bearing fruits) all invest deeply into the math and sciences.
They will get hit hard, but the BRICS countries can increase their trade between each other and co-invest in others. Now Iran and Saudi are willing to get on board there's even more potential for growth in the ME and Central Asia. Many LATAM and Africans nations already trade heavily with China and Russia.
My guess is the US deep state is foreseeing the collapse of Ukraine and is filling the "Russia's running out of ammo" narrative with "China is shipping weapons to Russia" narrative. They tested the waters with saying the DPRK sent weapons, and nobody questioned it, so now they are sticking it on China to bait Europe and the Quad into sanctions.
The US is an insincere ally, always has been, always will be. Throughout history the US has always provided aid in such a way that puts their "allies" in a more subservient position, sowing seeds of future crises to take advantage of.
Potentially Ninja Edit: Russia's military is actually battle hardened. The things they've learned in Syria are applicable in this conflict. Syria is standing today because of Russia, this conflict is a little bit easier because Russia can more readily absorb civilian populations and protect them.
Every push into enemy territory means a further, harder retreat. The Ukrainians may very well be overextending themselves. We've seen that the Russians have a methodical approach to taking territory, the UA relies on overwhelming strength in an area. Having the northern flank cut off and surrounded by UA would be a huge disaster, since many of those soldiers would be LPR citizens. The closer UA pushes to the border, the more dangerous the threat from the Russian skies are, and we know that Russia is using significantly less bombs and missiles than the US had used against Iraq (the last comparable conflict between modern militaries).
The "tactics" which you take issue with are working, because Ukraine spends more resources per kilometer of land taken than Russia does.
Ukraine has made it clear that they are not in any way interested in surrendering, so it would be a waste for Russia to chase them around the prairies. The best way to win the war is to exhaust Ukraine, which opens the discussion to that of imperialism.
The West is replenishing the wasteful UA military. There's an issue though, Western arms manufacturing in Europe relies on energy from Russia (lol). In tandem with the general energy crisis, Western defense production is now competing with civilian manufacturing and consumers, reinforcing an energy crisis across the West. Interestingly, the two groups who are actually gaining from this situation are the American and Russian gas producers, (there may be Russian bourgeois interest in extending this conflict, but that interest is shared with those wanting to overextend Western imperialism). Ukraine has become a blackhole of resources and one path to Russian victory is maintaining their low energy effort and the high Ukrainian effort as the longer UA holds out, the worse the blowback is for Europe as a whole. The long term process at stake here, the gamble the US has made, is the integration of Europe and the rest of Asia. The US hopes that this conflict gives them at least a century of a buffer before a Socialist Republic of China emerges as an alternative to global Capitalism, and European and Asian integration would be the economically obvious direction. We have to remember that this conflict has nothing to do with Ukraine, or putting missiles in Ukraine as a member of NATO, it is about creating a rift between Russia and the rest of Europe, and to keep the Eurasian continent from achieving economic integration. The US will continue to provoke conflict in the Eurasian continent to keep these countries on opposing sides of the barrel. Having Iran and Iraq fighting is good for the US. Having China preoccupied with Islamists is good for the US. Scaring Germany and Japan into remilitarizing is good for the US. Having Azerbaijan turn the attention of Russia and Iran is good for the US. Every conflict in Eurasia is a good opportunity in the eyes of the Beast.
The elephant in my comment is the Ukrainian civilians, particularly those of the "third sort" as accused by the Ukrainian fascists. Russia has to make tough decisions, they've chosen to withdraw in the north and take as many civilians with them as possible. Partially, this is what the nazis want, for the Russian speakers to leave the country and to expropriate their lands, but it is better for them to be alive so they can return when the nazi filth is mopped up.
I know that on a human level, we are distraught at the scene in Kharkiv, it's a blow to our humanity. We feel these emotions because we care. The Ukronazis haven't gotten away with it yet, there's still a universe where they will be punished.
I also want to point out that many of our comrades here who disagree with our takes on Decolonization are being good party members and holding the lines that their and many parties around the world are holding, hope in the American workers. But these parties especially the ones in the settler colonies of North America have not done the necessary investigation of their settler society and land and resource theft. Many of them are petit/semi (landed) bourgeois, educated, and through this have privileged entrance into Marxist theory, me included. We know that Lenin and the colonized comrades had an uphill battle against European Chauvinism within the international Communist movement which is what crystalized Marxism Leninism in the first place.
There is no reason to abstract internal colonization as either finished or different from external colonization, even calling it internal colonization makes it seem like the solution for the colonized Africans and indigenous nations is to absorb them into the settler nation. No, the settler states exist on stolen resources that they use to dominate the rest of the world, but its connection to wealth is here, inside its borders. It needs settlers to take land and hold it for the bourgeoisie to later expropriate. It needs settler dominated unions to build and work the environmentally extractive and damaging infrastructure that only benefits the settler masses. I posted about armed indigenous resistance (backed by the Panthers) to racist fishing enclosures in the 1960s that sparked the American Indian Movement, and that post had far less traction than this one about MWM.
American comrades, find out what tribes inhabited the places you have physical connections to. Learn how they came to no longer own that territory and why you and your people now do. You will learn far more about capitalism and America than through studying other movements, because our conditions are not the same. Apply the methodologies of MLism to the history of this continent, stop importing the solutions from others.